LawLoveLegal

I. Background of the Supreme Court Directions The Supreme Court of India has directed all States and Union Territories to frame and notify comprehensive media briefing policies for criminal cases within three months . The objective of the direction is to prevent media trials , protect the fairness of investigations , and safeguard the dignity and privacy of victims, witnesses, and accused persons . The direction was issued by a Bench comprising Justice M.M. Sundresh and Justice N. Kotiswar Singh , while dealing with a long-pending public interest litigation filed by the People’s Union for Civil Liberties (PUCL) in 1999 . The PIL highlighted the absence of structured guidelines governing police encounters and police communication with the media , especially during ongoing criminal investigations. Despite earlier judicial interventions and executive advisories, the Court noted that States had failed to demonstrate adequate seriousness in regulating police briefings, resulting in repeated...

Case Background — May 19, 2024 Crash at Kalyani Nagar The case arises from the May 19, 2024 incident in Pune, where a Porsche car allegedly driven by a 17-year-old under the influence of alcohol rammed into a motorcycle near Kalyani Nagar on Airport Road shortly after 2 a.m., resulting in the death of two bike riders — Anis Awadhiya and Ashwini Koshta. The accused juveniles were returning from a late-night party along with friends when the fatal crash occurred. The incident triggered widespread public outcry due to allegations of attempts to shield the juveniles and manipulate forensic evidence. Supreme Court Proceedings — Notice Issued on Bail Pleas The Supreme Court bench of Justices BV Nagarathna and Ujjal Bhuyan issued notice to the State of Maharashtra on the bail petitions filed by two of the accused after the Bombay High Court rejected their bail pleas on December 16. The Court directed the matter to be listed for hearing on January 30, while calling for the State’s response. Th...

Case Background — UAPA Charges and Alleged Larger Conspiracy The case arises from the alleged “larger conspiracy” behind the 2020 Delhi riots, investigated under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The prosecution alleged that the riots were the outcome of a coordinated conspiracy involving planning, mobilisation, and execution through protest networks. Multiple FIRs, supplementary charge sheets, and protected witnesses formed part of the case record. The Delhi High Court earlier referred to Umar Khalid and Sharjeel Imam as “intellectual architects” of the alleged conspiracy. Several accused challenged continued incarceration on grounds of prolonged custody and delay in trial. Supreme Court Grants Bail to Five Co-Accused — With Eleven Stringent Conditions The Supreme Court granted bail to five accused: • Gulfisha Fatima • Meeran Haider • Shifa-ur-Rehman • Mohd. Saleem Khan • Shadab Ahmed The Court imposed eleven strict bail conditions, including: • Personal bond of ₹2 lakh...

The Bombay High Court has granted interim relief to Russian national Pavel Aleksandrovich Prozorov , alleged mastermind of the OctaFX investment fraud, by restraining the adjudicating authority under the Prevention of Money Laundering Act, 2002 (PMLA) from confirming attachment of his properties until the next hearing. The matter will be heard again on January 19 . The order was passed by a Division Bench of Justice Revati Mohite Dere and Justice Sandesh Patil on December 22, in response to a writ petition moved through Prozorov’s power of attorney holder, Raviraja Kanyadi . Background of the Case: ED Probe and Alleged Forex Investment Scam Alleged Fraudulent Investment Scheme According to the Enforcement Directorate: • OctaFX allegedly lured investors with claims of – 2× returns in five months, and – 3× returns in eight months • The platform presented itself as a global forex trading service • It allegedly operated without RBI authorization • Investor funds were allegedly routed ove...

Case Title and Bench The Supreme Court, in a recent judgment delivered by a bench comprising Justice B.V. Nagarathna and Justice R. Mahadevan, held that the financial dominance of a husband over his estranged wife, in the context of a strained marital relationship, does not by itself amount to cruelty so as to attract prosecution under Section 498A of the Indian Penal Code.

Case Background and Procedural History The Allahabad High Court has set aside the conviction of Azad Khan, who had spent nearly 24 years in prison following a life sentence awarded in 2002 in connection with a dacoity case. The trial court had convicted him under Section 395 (dacoity) and Section 397 (robbery or dacoity with attempt to cause death or grievous hurt) of the Indian Penal Code, solely on the basis of his admission recorded during his statement under Section 313 of the Code of Criminal Procedure (CrPC). The conviction arose from allegations that in the year 2000, the appellant, along with 10–15 unidentified miscreants, allegedly entered the complainant’s residence, assaulted family members, looted valuables, and opened fire, injuring three persons. Conviction Based Solely on Section 313 CrPC Admission — Judicial Scrutiny The Division Bench comprising Justice JJ Munir and Justice Sanjiv Kumar observed that the trial court had erroneously premised the conviction exclusively o...

Case Background: Delay in Release Despite Supreme Court Bail Order The Supreme Court strongly criticised the Uttar Pradesh prison authorities for delaying the release of an undertrial Muslim accused, who had been granted bail under an anti-conversion case, but continued to remain in custody for almost one month after the order. The bench comprising Justice JB Pardiwala and Justice KV Viswanathan described the situation as “very sad” and “unfortunate”, observing that a citizen’s liberty was curtailed solely on account of a trivial technical objection raised by jail authorities. The Court held that even though all relevant details — identity of the accused, case number, offences, and police station — were clearly mentioned, the accused was not released merely because the order did not mention a sub-clause of Section 5 of the Uttar Pradesh Prohibition of Unlawful Conversion of Religion Act, 2021. Facts of the Case: Bail, Release Order, and Continued Detention The accused was facing trial ...

Introduction In a significant reaffirmation of personal liberty and criminal procedure safeguards, the Bombay High Court has held that an accused cannot be remanded to judicial custody merely for not applying for bail , particularly when the individual was never arrested during investigation and consistently appeared before the court pursuant to summons . The ruling underscores the constitutional limits on judicial power and reinforces the settled principle that custody is a legal status, not a procedural assumption . Background of the Case The ruling arose from a criminal case registered in 2023 , involving allegations that partners of AS Agri and Aqua Limited Liability Partnership defrauded investors of approximately ₹350 crore by promising unusually high returns. Alleged Offences The FIR invoked the following provisions: Section 406, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Criminal breach of trust Section 420, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita, 2023 – Cheating Section 427, Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhi...

Introduction In a significant reaffirmation of constitutional safeguards against custodial violence, the Jharkhand High Court has ordered a comprehensive probe and directed the immediate payment of ₹1.5 lakh as compensation to Jharkhand Loktantrik Krantikari Morcha (JLKM) leader Tarun Kumar Mahato , who was allegedly subjected to custodial thrashing by the police. The Court emphasised individual accountability of erring police officials , reinforcing the principle that custodial torture is a grave violation of fundamental rights . Background of the Case Arrest and Alleged Custodial Torture Date of Arrest : Night of November 28 Police Station : Ichagarh Police Station, Seraikela-Kharsawan district Allegation : Severe physical assault while in police custody Reason for Arrest : Dispute related to alleged illegal mining and transportation of sand Following his arrest, Tarun Kumar Mahato reportedly sustained serious injuries and has since been undergoing treatment at Seraikela Sadar Hos...

Introduction In a significant ruling clarifying the scope of criminal liability of corporate executives, the Bombay High Court has held that Indian criminal law does not recognise vicarious liability unless expressly provided by statute . The Court quashed criminal proceedings against the Managing Director and a civil engineer of a construction firm , ruling that criminal negligence cannot be presumed solely based on managerial position . The judgment reinforces a foundational principle of criminal jurisprudence: personal culpability is indispensable for criminal prosecution . Factual Background of the Case Construction Project and Incident Year of Incident : October 2017 Project : Construction of an overbridge at Wardha railway station Contractor : Someshwaraya Infrastructure, owned by Krishna Mandadi , a railway contractor Incident : A pit was dug at the construction site A two-and-a-half-year-old child , son of a labourer working at the site, drowned in the pit According to records...

The Supreme Court of India has issued a significant direction to all High Courts and State governments to ensure expeditious disposal of cases under the Unlawful Activities (Prevention) Act (UAPA). The Court stressed that terrorism-related matters must be handled with “efficacy and expediency,” especially considering the stringent nature of the law and the increasing pendency of cases. The directions were delivered by a bench comprising Justices Sanjay Karol and N. Kotiswar Singh while hearing the Central Bureau of Investigation’s (CBI) appeal in the 2010 Jnaneshwari Express derailment case , which claimed 148 lives and injured over 170 passengers. BACKGROUND: THE 2010 JNANESHWARI EXPRESS CASE The case relates to the derailment of the Jnaneshwari Express in West Bengal, allegedly caused by sabotage due to opposition to joint police-paramilitary operations against Maoist groups in the region. Eighteen accused individuals were granted bail by the Calcutta High Court, a decision chall...

The Allahabad High Court has delivered an important order addressing the balance between the protection granted under the Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 (SC/ST Act) and the need to prevent its misuse. While granting bail to two accused in a rape case, the Court underscored that the Act’s victim-centric provisions must not be abused. CASE BACKGROUND: NINE-YEAR DELAY IN FIR In the case before the Allahabad High Court, Justice Anil Kumar heard the bail applications of two appellants, Aznan Khan and Furkan Ilahi, accused of rape and offences under the SC/ST Act. The victim lodged an FIR in 2025 alleging offences that occurred in 2016. According to her statement, Furkan met her in 2016, took her to a hotel and then to the residence of co-accused Aznan Khan, where the alleged assault occurred. She stated that she remained silent for nearly nine years based on Furkan’s assurance that he would marry her. She further alleged continued physical r...

Introduction In a significant ruling reinforcing the primacy of natural justice and procedural fairness, the Delhi High Court has restrained the Central Government from demolishing structures in and around the historic Ajmer Sharif Dargah without giving affected individuals an opportunity to be heard. The order came while hearing a petition challenging a November 22, 2025 notice issued by the Centre-appointed Nazim directing removal of alleged encroachments inside the Dargah premises. The court categorically observed that the Centre “cannot just go with a bulldozer and raze everything” without following due process. This judgment adds to the growing judicial scrutiny of arbitrary demolitions and underscores the constitutional obligation to ensure fairness even in matters involving encroachments and security considerations. “YOU JUST CAN’T GO WITH A BULLDOZER…” – COURT’S STRONG OBSERVATION Judicial Concern Over Vague Notice Justice Sachin Datta remarked that the November 22 no...